SIGN IN SUBSCRIBE

News Update

PLI scheme for electronics manufacturing sees incremental investment of Rs 8,390 CrG20 finance leaders agree to tax super-rich but forum not yet readyDPIIT promotes green logistics industry balancing economic growth and environmentIndia, US ink pact to stymie illegal trafficking of cultural propertyRailways expands tracks by 31,180 kmFroth in Yamuna river: Delhi complains to Centre against UP and HaryanaGovt to enhance reach of Indian Digital Public InfrastructureFormer BJP Minister says BJP has totally failed as Opposition in KarnatakaGovt provides incentives to small tea growersEU penalises 5 countries for infringing budget rulesI-T-Transaction involving transfer of unutilised shares cannot be deemed to be sale of shares so as to attract levy of Long Term Capital Gain u/s 112: ITATChina says Relations with Japan at critical stageST - Once the activity of appellant that is of forfeituring the amount of earnest money is not a declared service, question of retaining said money as consideration for rendering such service becomes absolutely redundant: CESTATEU medicines regulator disapproves Alzheimer’s new drugSC says no restrictions on voluntary name banners along Kanwar route eateriesFM favours debt reduction but sans affecting economic growthKargil Victory Day: PM warns Pak against practising terrorismChina pumps in subsidies worth USD 41 bn into car sectorMisc - Payments made to Government cannot be deemed to be a tax merely because statute provides for their recovery as arrears: SC CBMisc - Royalty not a tax; royalty is contractual consideration paid by mining lessee to lessor for enjoyment of mineral rights & liability to pay royalty arises out of contractual conditions of mining lease: SC CBMisc - Since power to tax mineral rights is provided for in Entry 50 of List II, Parliament cannot use its residuary powers in this subject matter: SC CBCus - Owner of goods has a liability to pay customs duty even after confiscated goods are redeemed on payment of fine - Interest follows: SC
 
Admissibility of CENVAT Credit on Telecom Towers - Matter referred to Larger Bench - Third Member reference in Idea Cellular case converted into reference to Larger Bench

By TIOL News Service

NEW DELHI, SEPT 09, 2015: THE dispute involved is whether the appellant is eligible for CENVAT Credit on Telecom Towers. During the course of extension of Stay already granted, the appellant stated that in another case (the case of Idea Mobile) involving the same issue viz. availability of CENVAT credit in respect of telecom towers, there has been a difference of opinion between the Members of the Division Bench and the matter is put up to the Hon'ble President, CESTAT for referring the matter to 3rd Member/Larger Bench. The appellant has pleaded that although vide the Misc. applications, it has only requested to adjourn the hearing and allow it to be an intervener in the case of Idea Mobile, as an intervener, it will not be able to argue the matter on facts and therefore instead of referring the difference of opinion to a 3rd Member, the President may constitute a Larger Bench of three Members which could consider the difference of opinion as well as these appeals. The appellant also pleaded that the President has full powers to constitute such a Bench and relied on some earlier decisions.

After considering the submissions on both sides, the Tribunal observed:

It is evident from the language of sub-section (5) of Section 129C that in case of difference of opinion, the President can refer the case for hearing on such point of difference by the one or more of the other Members of the Tribunal. It clearly means that the difference of opinion in a Division Bench need not necessarily and always be referred only to a single 3rd Member.

From the two judicial pronouncements in the cases of Dawoodi Bohra Community (2005) 2 Supreme Court Cases 673 and Paras Laminates Pvt Ltd. - 2002-TIOL-48-SC-CUS there remains no doubt that the President of CESTAT has full discretion/power regarding framing of roster, constitution of benches and directing any particular matter to be placed for hearing before any particular bench of any strength.

In the present appeals the issue involved is the same as that involved in the case of Idea Mobile which the Ld Member of Division Bench expressed a difference of opinion which is to be resolved. If that matter is referred to a 3rd Member, then these appeals will not be able to be tagged therewith and as an intervener, the appellants will not be able to argue the question of fact. In these circumstances, it will be more efficient if the difference of opinion is heard by a 3 Member Larger Bench in which case these appeals can also be heard by the same Bench. Accordingly, it is decided that these matters should be placed before the President with a request that the difference of opinion in the case of Idea Mobile may be referred to a Larger Bench of 3 Members and these appeals should be allowed to be tagged therewith to be heard by the same Larger Bench.

(See 2015-TIOL-1895-CESTAT-DEL)


 RECENT DISCUSSION(S) POST YOUR COMMENTS
   
 
Sub: Cenvat credit on Telecom Towers

In the case of Bharti Airtel Ltd. vs. CCE, Pune III [2014-TIOL-1452-HC-MUM-ST], Bombay High Court has already held that Cellular Mobile Service provider is not entitled to avail CENVAT credit on Tower Parts & Pre-fabricated buildings. On the basis of this judegment, CBEC has issued an Instruction F. No. 267/60/2014-CX.8 dated 11.11.2014, which is available on CBEC's website.

Posted by S B Parikh
 

TIOL Tube Latest

TIOL Tube
Dr. Shailendra Kumar, Chairman, TIOL Knowledge Foundation, addressing the gathering

TOP NEWS


AR not Afar by SK Rahman

VISION 360



Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.

TII LATEST

TIOLCORPLAWS LATEST